Cues to Deception and Ability to Detect Lies as a Function of Police Interview Styles

In Experiment 1, we examined whether three interview styles used by the police, accusatory, information-gathering and behaviour analysis, reveal verbal cues to deceit, measured with the Criteria-Based Content Analysis (CBCA) and Reality Monitoring (RM) methods. A total of 120 mock suspects told the truth or lied about a staged event and were interviewed by a police officer employing one of these three interview styles. The results showed that accusatory interviews, which typically result in suspects making short denials, contained the fewest verbal cues to deceit. Moreover, RM distinguished between truth tellers and liars better than CBCA. Finally, manual RM coding resulted in more verbal cues to deception than automatic coding of the RM criteria utilising the Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC) software programme.In Experiment 2, we examined the effects of the three police interview styles on the ability to detect deception. Sixty-eight police officers watched some of the videotaped interviews of Experiment 1 and made veracity and confidence judgements. Accuracy scores did not differ between the three interview styles; however, watching accusatory interviews resulted in more false accusations (accusing truth tellers of lying) than watching information-gathering interviews. Furthermore, only in accusatory interviews, judgements of mendacity were associated with higher confidence. We discuss the possible danger of conducting accusatory interviews.     

Assessment of child witness statements using criteria-based content analysis (CBCA): The effects of age,verbal ability,and interviewer's emotional style

Abstract

The goal of the study was to determine what effects age, verbal ability (assessed with WISC-R Vocabulary), and interviewer's emotional style would have on the occurrence of Criteria-Based Content Analysis (CBCA) criteria. Children (N = 68) from three different age-groups (7–8, 10–11, and 13–14 years) made both a true and a false statement concerning a mildly traumatic event. The correct classification rate was 66%. Age and verbal ability were found to increase the occurrence of some of the CBCA criteria irrespective of the truthfulness of the statements. Also, different criteria differentiated between true and false statements in different age groups. Interviewer behaviour also affected the occurrence of the criteria. It is concluded that the CBCA should not be used in court proceedings in its present form.     

Can Criteria-Based Content Analysis Distinguish Between True and False Statements of African-American Speakers?

The Criteria-Based Content Analysis (CBCA) technique is the core component of the Statement Validity Assessment (SVA), an interviewing process that attempts to judge allegations of child sexual abuse for truthfulness. As the nucleus of the SVA, the CBCA has been promoted as a way to detect truth by analyzing the verbal content of such an allegation. However, all conclusions of the CBCA's usefulness as an indicator of truth have been based on European and/or White perspectives, and this is the first study to address the implications of probable differences of verbal content meaning across ethnic groups. The results failed to support the hypotheses that Black speakers' truthful statements contained fewer criteria than Whites' statements, or that CBCA training would only enhance truth detection of White speakers. First, in contrast to earlier work, the present study found that, despite the fact that true and false statements contained criteria to differing degrees, the total number of CBCA criteria in an adult's statement was uncorrelated with truthfulness for statements made by Blacks or by Whites. A discriminant analysis showed that CBCA verbal content criteria did, in fact, have different significance for Whites than for Blacks. Certain CBCA criteria were stronger predictors of truth for one ethnic group than for the other. It is suggested that more research is needed before the CBCA is relied upon in criminal investigations.     

Children recalling an event repeatedly: Effects on RM and CBCA scores

Purpose. The fact that abused children often talk about their experiences before entering the legal system is a neglected factor in terms of the validation of different reliability assessment techniques. Hence, the present study investigated the extent to which the scores of the reality monitoring technique (RM) and the criteria‐based content analysis technique (CBCA) were affected by the number of times children recalled an experienced or an imagined event. Method. Children (aged 12–13 years, N – 80) participated in an experiment where half the sample experienced a real event (an interaction with a stranger outside his car) and then recalled it either one or four times (over a period of 14 days), and the other half imagined the same event and thereafter recalled it either one or four times. The statements given at the final (or only) recall session were analysed with both CBCA and RM. Results. The results revealed that, on a multivariate level, both the CBCA and RM sets of criteria discriminated between truthful and fabricated statements. The total RM score (but not the total CBCA score) discriminated reliably between truthful and fabricated statements. Furthermore, RM (but not CBCA) were sensitive to the number of times the experienced or imagined event was recalled: increased presence of criteria after repeated recall. Conclusions. The results were rather promising for the RM and less so for the CBCA. Furthermore, we found that the number of recalls moderated the effectiveness of the techniques. Hence, when assessing the reliability of a child's memory, it is crucial to learn about the history of the first documented statement.     

Criteria-Based Content Analysis: An empirical test of its underlying processes

Abstract

Criteria-Based Content Analysis (CBCA) is a tool to assess the veracity of written statements, and is used as evidence in criminal courts in several countries in the world. CBCA scores are expected to be higher for truth tellers than for liars. The underlying assumption of CBCA is that (i) lying is cognitively more difficult than truth telling, and (ii) that liars are more concerned with the impression they make on others than truth tellers. However, these assumptions have not been tested to date. In the present experiment 80 participants (undergraduate students) lied or told the truth about an event. Afterwards, they completed a questionnaire measuring “cognitive load” and “tendency to control speech”. The interviews were transcribed and coded by trained CBCA raters. In agreement with CBCA assumptions, (i) truth tellers obtained higher scores than liars, (ii) liars experienced more cognitive load than truth tellers, and (iii) liars tried harder to control their speech. However, cognitive load and speech control were not correlated with CBCA scores in the predicted way.     

Offenders’ uncoerced false confessions: A new application of statement analysis?

Purpose. Deception detection research has mainly studied denials and distortions given by students. This study examined true and false confessions as told by offenders. It was hypothesized that the statement analytic techniques Criteria‐Based Content Analysis (CBCA) and Reality Monitoring (RM) would discriminate truths and lies. Methods. Truthful and deceptive confessions to crime were given by 30 offenders (both women and men) in a within‐subject design. The participants were in prison at the time of data collection, and told the truth about a crime they had committed and been sentenced for. In addition, they made up a lie about a different crime after a few minutes of preparation. The transcribed statements were scored for CBCA and RM criteria. Results. Results showed that neither total CBCA nor total RM scores differentiated between lies and truths. Some individual CBCA criteria, however, showed differences: more self‐deprecations and doubts about own testimony in the told lies, and more unexpected complications in the truths. Conclusions. The results are discussed in relation to statement analysis of offenders’ accounts, individual CBCA criteria, as well as the development of criminal experience and familiarity with the event and setting. Implications for triers of fact and suggestions for future research are considered.     

Detecting deception in suspects: verbal cues as a function of interview strategy

Research on deception has consistently shown that people are poor at detecting deception, partly due to lack of consistent cues to deception. This research focuses on eliciting verbal cues to deception when questioning suspects who deny crime and how such cues differ due to type of questioning. An experiment examined verbal differences between innocent and guilty mock suspects (N=96) as a function of veracity and interview style (Free recall, Probes, or Free recall plus Probes). Guilty (vs innocent) suspects omitted more crime-relevant information and their statements were more likely to contradict the evidence, showing that statement–evidence inconsistency was a cue to deception. This cue to deception was more pronounced when the interview contained probes. Lie-catchers (N=192) obtained an accuracy rate higher than chance (61.5%) for detecting deceptive denials. Implications for further research on verbal cues to deception are discussed.     

The devil is in the detail: deception and consistency over repeated interviews

ABSTRACT

Research indicates that truthful statements typically contain more details than fabricated statements, and that truth tellers are no more consistent than liars over multiple interviews. In this experiment, we examine the impact of (i) multiple interviewers and (ii) reverse order recall on liars’ and truth tellers’ consistency and amount of reported detail over repeated recall attempts. Participants either took part in a mock crime (lying condition) or an innocent event (truth telling condition) which they were subsequently interviewed about in two separate interview phases. Truth tellers provided more details overall, and more reminiscent details than liars. There were no differences between veracity groups for the number of omissions made or repetitions reported. Despite the popular belief that inconsistency is a cue to deception, we found little support for the notion that consistency (or lack of consistency) offers a diagnostic cue to deception. We found little evidence that switching interviewer or recalling in reverse order induced inconsistencies in liars. In fact, due to the number of reminiscent details in truth tellers’ accounts, our findings suggest that accounts provided by liars tend to be slightly more consistent than those provided by truth tellers. Materials for this paper can be found at osf.io/hgvmk/.     

Does the truth come out in the writing? Scan as a lie detection tool

We tested the accuracy of Scientific Content Analysis (SCAN), a verbal lie detection tool that is used world-wide by federal law enforcement and military agencies. Sixty-one participants were requested to write down the truth, an outright lie or a concealment lie about activities they had just completed. The statements were coded with SCAN and with another verbal lie detection tool, Reality Monitoring (RM). RM discriminated significantly between truth tellers and outright liars and between truth tellers and concealment liars, whereas SCAN did not discriminate between truth tellers and either kind of liar. Implications of the findings for the suitability of SCAN as a lie detection tool are discussed.     

Detecting children's false allegations and recantations of a crime

This study examined adults’ abilities to detect the veracity of children's (ages 6–11) initial disclosures and their later recantations about a crime. Children (N?=?32) were asked to make a false denial or a false accusation of an alleged theft, while some were asked to tell the truth. Afterwards, children recanted their initial statements in a second interview; thus, children who initially denied the theft accused a researcher of the transgression in the second interview, and vice-versa. Adult raters (ages 18–25; N?=?108) watched both interviews and completed a questionnaire that required them to determine the veracity (i.e. whether the report was true or false) and credibility of the disclosure. Adults accurately detected the veracity of children's reports 53% of the time (55% of original reports, 50% of recantations). Raters were more accurate when detecting false denials than false accusations in the children's original and recanted reports. Despite being more difficult to detect, children's recanted denials that became accusations were rated as the least credible. Furthermore, self-reported level of experience with children and ratings confidence were not significant predictors of truth/lie detection accuracy.     

Interviewing to Detect Deception: When to Disclose the Evidence?

Research shows that there are few objective cues to deception. However, it may be possible to create such cues by strategic interviewing techniques. Strategic Use of Evidence (SUE) is one such technique. The basic premise of the SUE technique is that liars and truth tellers employ different counter-interrogation strategies, and that the evidence against the suspect can be used to exploit these differences in strategies. This study examined the effect of the timing of evidence disclosure (early vs. late vs. gradual) on verbal cues to deception. We predicted that late disclosure would be most effective in differentiating between liars and truth-tellers, and that cues to deception in the gradual disclosure condition would progressively disappear due to the suspects’ realization that evidence against them exists. That is, we expected that liars in the gradual presentation condition would become more consistent with the evidence over time. A sample of 86 undergraduate students went through a mock-terrorism paradigm (half innocent, half guilty), and were subsequently interviewed using one of three disclosure strategies: early, gradual, and late disclosure. We measured statement-evidence inconsistencies as cues to deception . Results supported our predictions in that cues to deception were most pronounced in the late disclosure condition. Contrary to our expectations, the results suggested that presenting the evidence gradually may put innocent suspects at a higher risk of misclassification as they seem to adopt a strategy that is more similar to guilty suspects.     

Helping to sort the liars from the truth‐tellers: The gradual revelation of information during investigative interviews

Research examining detection of verbal deception reveals that lay observers generally perform at chance. Yet, in the criminal justice system, laypersons that have not undergone specialist investigative training are frequently called upon to make veracity judgements (e.g., solicitors; magistrates; juries). We sought to improve performance by manipulating the timing of information revelation during investigative interviews. A total of 151 participants played an interactive computer game as either a truth‐teller or a deceiver, and were interviewed afterwards. Game information known to the interviewer was revealed either early, at the end of the interview, or gradually throughout. Subsequently, 30 laypersons individually viewed a random selection of interviews (five deceivers and five truth‐tellers from each condition), and made veracity and confidence judgements. Veracity judgements were most accurate in the gradual condition, p < .001, η² = .97 (above chance), and observers were more confident in those judgements, p < .001, η² = .99. Deceptive interviewees reported the gradual interviews to be the most cognitively demanding, p < .001; η² = .24. Our findings suggest that the detection of verbal deception by non‐expert observers can be enhanced by employing interview techniques that maximize deceivers' cognitive load, while allowing truth‐tellers the opportunity to respond to evidence incrementally.     

The impact of questioning style on the content of investigative interviews with suspected child sexual abuse victims

Abstract

This study explored the influence of question type and interviewer style on the quantity and quality of responses offered by children in interviews for suspected sexual abuse. The analysis covered 36 investigative interviews conducted by polia officers under the Memorandum of Good Practice with children aged 4–7, 8–11 and 12–14 years. The dependent measures were the temporel length of children's answers and the number of criteria derived from Criteria Based Cornent Analysis (CBCA) they contained. Only 2% of all questions were open-ended, but just 3% were judged leading. Open questions were most effective with 12–14 year olds but not with younger children who provided nose information in response to specific yet not leading or closed questions. Longer answers containing move CBCA criteria were associated with interviews containing many affirmative utterances and verbal affirmations and a brief rapport. The implications of these findings for interview theory and practice are briefly discussed.     

The detection of deception with the reality monitoring approach: a review of the empirical evidence

One of the verbal approaches to the detection of deceit is based on research on human memory that tries to identify the characteristics that differentiate between internal and external memories (reality monitoring). This approach has attempted to extrapolate the contributions of reality monitoring (RM) research to the deception area. In this paper, we have attempted to review all available studies conducted in several countries in order to yield some general conclusions concerning the discriminative power of this approach. Regarding individual criteria, the empirical results are not very encouraging: few criteria discriminate significantly across studies, and there are several variables that moderate their effect. Some of the contradictory findings may have emerged because of differences in the operationalizations and procedures used across individual studies. However, more promising results have been reported in recent studies, and the approach as a whole appears to discriminate above chance level, reaching accuracy rates that are similar to those of criteria-based content analysis (CBCA). Some suggestions for future research are made.